Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T06:58:51.902Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Health Policy Watch: Second, Let No Harm Be Done: An American Antiimmigration Dilemma

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2009

Joseph C. d'Oronzio
Joseph C. d'Oronzio
Affiliation:
Assistant Clinical Professor in Health Policy and Management, Columbia University School of Public Health, and provides bioethics training and consultation services in several New Jersey teaching hospitals.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Ongoing legislative proposals to overhaul United States immigration policy look very much like a new wave of nativism is sweeping the Congress. The movement, mounted in early 1995, is in full swing to limit immigrant populations from arriving, settling, producing, and benefiting as our parents' generations have done. Legislators and the courts are now considering the most complete antiimmigration social legislation since the decades following the First World War.

Type
Departments and Columns
Information
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Volume 5 , Issue 3 , Summer 1996 , pp. 467 - 472
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Purdy, M. Unlikely allies battle congress over anti-immigration plans. New York Times 1995;10 4: Bl;Google ScholarHolmes, A. The strange politics of immigration. New York Times 1995;12 31:4/3.Google Scholar

2. Kilborn, T. Foreign doctors flocking to rescue long-shunned areas of dire poverty. New York Times 1991;11 2:A15.Google Scholar

3. Rosenthal, E. Competition and cutbacks hurt foreign doctors in U.S. New York Times 1995;11 7:A1.Google Scholar

4. Ayres, BD Jr. Californians pass measure on aliens; courts to bar it. New York Times 1994;11 10:B7.Google Scholar

5. Among the California associations voicing opposition was the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the California Medical Society, following upon its national affiliate, the American Medical Association. In December 1995, the American Public Health Association formally promulgated a policy statement in opposition to antiimmigration statutes.

6. Ziv, TA, Lo, B. Denial of care to illegal immigrants. New England Journal of Medicine 1995;332(16): 1095–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7. The San Francisco (Western Regional Office) of the Boston-based, Physicians for Social Human Rights has been a clearinghouse for professional concern on this issue. A similar function for bioeth-icists is developing simultaneously in each of the major professional associations.